Sigh ...
This debate misses a number of fundamental points.
Resources are always moving around in universities. They tend to move slowly because universities are human institutions and tumult is bad. But resources do need to move. At mine, the English department was double the size of the economics department despite serving fewer than half the number of students and having about 1/3 the number of majors (and still declining). Pressures build within schools like A&S and eventually deans decide that the retiring T.S. Elliot scholar who teaches 12-students in 35 person classes won't be replaced. Instead, that position will go to the psychology or health sciences department whose 35 person classes have 50 person wait lists.
This is not about the "death of the humanities" writ large. Yes, big humanities departments are shrinking. They are not disappearing. And most people on campus with decision making authority understand the importance of a rich set of humanities disciplines and course offerings. That's what makes the "uni" in university.
Some small programs likely do need to be shut down so resources can be moved. But that's not the job of state legislatures absent clear evidence that the decision makers closer to the issue (administrative leaders on campus) are dysfunctional. In most cases, these resource allocation decisions should be made on campus after due consideration of the costs and benefits. States set the broad outlines of the budget, but universities are better positioned to determine how to allocate that budget across competing needs.
In other words, what Ax said, but with the argument that the proper decision makers are on campus.
